Letters to the Editor
EMStoveken
Published Letters: 406 Editor's Choice: 44
-
Change requires a multipronged attack . . .
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]On Sept. 15, while the streets of Washington were filled with your standard issue motley assemblage of sign carrying protesters, I was there as well. My gig? Hanging out with my family on the sidelines engaging the grossly outnumbered counterprotesters.
I wouldn't call my efforts wildly successful, but I did get a few of them to think about the difference between Patriotism and Nationalism. A few of them even admitted that the war was bad and that supporting the troops did not automatically mean supporting the war or the administation.
Those conversations never would have happened without the protest.
There are members of Code Pink are shrill and irritating and come off as kind of psychotic.
There are others (like those coordinating the kum-buy-ya (sp?) soundtracked activities in Berkeley) are just looking for a support group and an outlet for the their sadness and frustration.
There are anti-war voices in Congress trying to legislate our way out of this thing.
There are soldiers coming forward to describe the horrors and madness of war.
There are barstool pacificists making their case over a few cold ones with knee-jerk hawks and political agnostics.
There are puppeteers building paper mache effigies of Dick Cheney guiding George Bush around in an S&M style harness, leash and ball-gag outfit.
There are bloggers and their commenters.
There are (rare) investigative journalists.
Each element is necessary to change minds and keep the conversation moving. I can understand one's frustration at any one element; but that's like being frustrated at a tire for not doing the job of an entire car.
-
Not good.
[Read the article: Another GOP congressman expected to retire]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Don't start dancing just yet.
Let us remember that Congress' overall approval rating is in the toilet. Incumbents of any stripe are in trouble. By retiring, these Republican congressman (presumably in right-leaning districts) clear the way for new Republicans to enter the race, giving the impression of change and potential improvement.
The move is rather ingenius as the Democratic opponents in these districts will not have an incumbent's deplorable record to exploit.
-
Once again . . .
[Read the article: Scooter Libby disbarred]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]George W Bush stated, while commuting Libby's sentence, that he agreed with the verdict that Libby perjured himself and obstructed justice.
What has been done to correct his lies or obtain justice?
The president is yet to be taken to task on this.
-
@ rtf100 and Blank
[Read the article: Bomb, bomb Iran?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Reason, logic and common sense all dictate that there is no chance of us attempting to mix things up with Iran. In that you are both correct.
The problem is that I genuinely fear (and not just from reading the placard clutching hysterics of left wing media) that the "Neo-conservative" movement in American politics cares not for these things.
When you look at the sheer volume of anti-Iran rhetoric flying around out there, when you compare it to the propaganda used to drive us into Junior's Freudian War of Choice, when you listen to the things coming out of McCain's mouth; you have to wonder WHY they would be saying these things.
I fear that you both have too much faith in the human race.
-
*Sigh*
[Read the article: Nagourney: "At least one scenario where Clinton could win"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Barring consecutive blow-outs by either candidate in the remaining primaries, this race is going to come down to the endorsement of the superdelegates. Just as votes in the general election are little more than requests made to the electoral college, so now are Democratic primary votes suggestions to this group of professional politicians.
Good deal!
And I say that as a perennial ranter against the electoral college.
Thing is, this is a strategic decision. The two sub-par candidates that have rammed down our throats by big money and the media now to be weighed, measured and examined. It's almost irrelevant the kind of job that they will do running the country, now that we have the worst case scenario staring at us across the aisle.
It is time for some cold decisions to be made as to which one of these yahoos can beat McCain. If I were a superdelegate I would be contacting the candidates and asking about VP nods. Not for myself but for a better idea of what kind of ticket we will be putting up against McCain/Leiberman (my current 4:1 bet for a faux-unity ticket from the Repugs).
Either Clinton or Obama can walk out of the convention with the nomination at this point. I just think it's sad that they are both going to be walking wounded. Neither one is a lock for November. A pathetic state of affairs considering the state of our nation.
-
@Debaser
[Read the article: Nagourney: "At least one scenario where Clinton could win"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Speaking of Fear and Loathing '72 . . . I just reread it recently, and I must say that the parallels are disturbing. If you read about McGovern's road to the nomination, the weird semi-brokered convention and then the inexplicable collapse against a Nixon campaign that simply managed not to fuck up too monumentally (or at least didn't get caught in time), you will see a lot that McGovern had in common with Obama.
If I were working for either of the remaining campaigns, I would spend a night reading that book. It may prove quite instructional.
Mind you, this is not a defence of WES. Just an observation.